When considering the viability of utilizing either Pavement Reclamation, Cold in Place Recycling (CIR), or Deep Cold in Place Recycling (DCIR) in the rehabilitation or reconstruction of roads, cost comparisons against traditional methods are necessary to satisfy concerns that the proper construction techniques are employed to help minimize life cycle costs.

Some key saving considerations include:

• Elimination of the possibility of reflective cracking.
• The ability to increase the structural capacity of the road without subgrade reconstruction or heavy overlays.
• Reduction in energy consumption through fuel savings in asphalt production and cartage.
• Recycling granular materials.
• Reduction in demand on gravel resources.
• Reduction in traffic stress on roadways during construction.
• Retaining road–widths by reducing overlay thicknesses.

Using Equivalent Granular Thickness (EGT) numbers in the design process is a convenient method of comparing rehabilitation techniques. Gravel is considered to have an EGT of 1 whereas virgin asphalt concrete pavement has an EGT of 2. Straight reclaimed asphalt and gravel blends can be considered as having a structural equivalent of gravel, while the inclusion of emulsions into the reclaimed material in the CIR and DCIR processes increase the EGT of the material within the range of 1.5 to 1.8 dependent on aggregate quality and gradation.